It was very interesting reading the article by Emily Dennis in yesterdays EDP. There is a major problem for first time buyers and without them a vital link in the housing chain is lost.
It was also a vindication of everything SNUB has been saying. Even at the hearing into the Joint Core Strategy, they pointed out the potential problems about the costs of housing. They supported the National Housing Federation who they were insisting that rural housing should be created in Local Communities by dispersing new developments in sharp contrast to the policy being adopted by Broadland.
Now it appears that three months after signing off the Joint Core Stratgy which concentrates all development in Broadland within the Norwich North East Triangle, they now wish to support local communities, apparently by joining forces with South Norfolk who have always taken a different view on dispersal. Since Broadland insisted that dispersal was not an option, it is a welcome surprise to see this u-turn. It was never a sound policy to demand that all those in need of housing would have to come into their artificially created new town.
Mrs Cottingham, the Broadland Councillor for Housing and member for Aylsham who is extensively quoted in this article (EDP 20 June 2011 Page 9) does not appear to be supporting her town council. The Evening News of the same day reports that Wednesday’s Broadland District Council planning committee will be recommended to refuse a 300-home development on the edge of Aylsham that could free up land to improve the high school’s facilities on the grounds that it would be an “unjustifiable incursion into the countryside”.
Apparently, the community benefit of giving land to the school to be developed as a family sports village for school and community use was “not sufficiently compelling” to go against the development plan. Though the development plan calls for a minimum of 300 houses to be built at Aylsham. Local Houses for local people ?
Maybe not in this case.
Wait til the current application for 300 houses on an even more rural and remote site near Aylsham goes to committee. That one comes with only a football pitch as the sop. But guess which one has support from the local members, and will be recommended for approval, at the whim of the members, who also fought to prevent it being considered at the same planning committee meeting as the 250 home scheme referred to above? nothing to do with Mrs Cottingham renting her house from the same landowner, of course, or the relationship between that landowner and other BDC members...
ReplyDeletePresumably Mrs Cottingham is one of those who cannot find an affordable house to buy or rent.
ReplyDeleteIs she on the housing register? No wonder that Broadland is so keen to build all these houses on greenfields. Perhaps one of her many councillor pals who have a second home might let her stay in one of them. Better still they should sell their second home because that reduces the number of affordable houses. For councillors to stand up and say there is a shortage of houses whilst owning a second or holiday property is utter hypocracy.